Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41899963›Full record

ArticleEntropy (Basel, Switzerland)2026

A Benchmark for Entropy Estimators.

Lucio M Calcagnile, Angelo Di Garbo, Stefano Galatolo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Entropy (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Lucio M CalcagnileIstituto di Biofisica, CNR, Via G. Moruzzi 1, 56124 Pisa, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-3572-6154
Angelo Di GarboIstituto di Biofisica, CNR, Via G. Moruzzi 1, 56124 Pisa, Italy.ORCID 0009-0000-9065-5163
Stefano GalatoloDipartimento di Matematica, Università di Pisa, Via Buonarroti 1, 56127 Pisa, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-3934-5412

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study assessed the performance of several entropy estimators for numerical time series and symbolic data on non-trivial one-dimensional dynamical systems whose Kolmogorov-Sinai entropy is known with certified accuracy: recent computer-assisted proof techniques provide rigorous values together with explicit error bounds. We considered four classes of interval maps, including piecewise expanding maps with and without a Markov partition and an intermittent Pomeau-Manneville map, and generated long orbits for each system. We then compared the certified entropy with the output of widely used estimators: Approximate Entropy, Sample Entropy, Permutation Entropy, a symbolic Plug-In estimator of the entropy rate, and the Non-Sequential Recursive Pair Substitution (NSRPS) method (the latter two with Grassberger-type bias correction). Our experiments reveal substantial, dynamics-dependent differences in accuracy and robustness. In particular, Approximate Entropy and the symbolic methods (Plug-In and NSRPS) consistently yielded estimates within the rigorous error bars across all systems, whereas Sample Entropy showed a marked systematic underestimation, and Permutation Entropy exhibited large biases, especially for expanding maps without a Markov partition. The resulting benchmark provides a quantitative testbed for evaluating entropy estimation techniques in deterministic dynamical systems.

Indexed as

complexityKolmogorov–Sinai entropyLyapunov exponenttime series

Identifiers

PMID41899963
PMCPMC13025062

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.